Harlem Tourism Board
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 460657365
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 9178217099
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Business and Industry
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,574
- Expenses
- $4,921
- Assets
- $2,846
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM A ROGERS (PRESIDENT)
- RICHARD COX (VICE PRESIDENT/ TREASURER)
People named in this filing
- WILLIAM A ROGERS (PRESIDENT)
- RICHARD COX (VICE PRESIDENT/ TREASURER)
- GEORGE SAINTEUS (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Harlem tourism board major objective is to create partnerships with tourism related businesses in harlem and members of the New York city tourism board to develop a mutually beneficial economic growth engine for one of the most famous urban communities in the world and make harlem a must see tourism destination
What it reported doing in 2024
Make harlem the centerpiece of harlem's economic development efforts
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.7%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 28.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.